[–] aria_taint 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
You're completely wrong. The Constitution gives the president that right under 8 U.S. Code ยง 1182 - Inadmissible aliens. It's activist judges that are aligned as basically hating Trump and not following the law but defining the law in there own way and not as it's written.
[–] ZYX321 ago (edited ago)
I'm not saying it is. I'm saying it might be, as defined by the supreme court. If they strike it down, it might not be the law itself, just how it became law.
Their motivations aside.
Edit: I looked at the code you mentioned... It's huge. Is there a specific thing in there?
Edit 2:
Interesting... Now I am invested and will be curious to hear their opinions... The especially interesting part is that it says when "the President finds" that given immigrants are bad. Not that they have to be demonstrably bad. But the "President finds".
[–] aria_taint ago
As you can see from your Edit 2 the 9th and 4th circuit court 100% failed to uphold the law. They
INTERPRETEDTWISTED it to fit there agenda not the law as written. I really hope the SC reverses the lower courts decision but Roberts and Ginsburg are big problems. Ginsburg needs to recuse herself because she was very out spoken during the election as very anti Trump and pro Clinton and Roberts we all know is an agenda driven justice and his agenda is being a shill for the dems.